Nate Bird: Vote Yes on 2A

I am writing in support of Vote Yes on 2A for Trails and Yampa River Park, an initiative that will only continue to support the key driver of revenue to our town — tourism. It is plainly obvious the benefits this town sees from cycling tourism, and expanding the offerings that draw them here is economic common sense. Events such as Bike Week, the USA Pro Challenge, the Steamboat Stinger and the Steamboat Springs Stage Race, among many other events, make it clearly evident the economic gains we see from hosting these events.

Cyclists travel for spectating, riding and racing hence also buying lodging, frequenting restaurants, patronizing bike shops and all other local businesses as they peruse our little piece of mountain paradise. Though my personal interests lie in cycling, 2A spans far beyond just serving the interests of cyclists. It will help entice tourism from all types of outdoor enthusiasts.

As a member of the Steamboat community who truly cares about the viability and success of our town and our lifestyle, an avid cyclist, as well as an employee of a local company in the cycling/outdoor industry that employs over 80 local residents, I only can see positives coming from the passing of 2A.

First of all, it does not cost the residents of Steamboat Springs anything; this is not a new tax or a tax on residents — the visitors to our town pay a tax on their lodging costs that goes to fund this initiative. In the past few years, we have seen a huge growth in bike tourism and continuing to build upon our amazing trail network will only further bill Steamboat as a year-round, world-class tourist destination.

Furthermore, the Yampa River Park will build more public amenities to enhance the beauty of our downtown area and provide both tourists and residents alike a place to relax and enjoy themselves after participating in the activities they traveled here to engage in. The riverfront will be enjoyed by absolutely everyone who comes into town to participate in the myriad diverse events that take place here during the course of any given year; it a huge value-added asset that will be added to any tourist’s Steamboat experience.

This tax has proven itself more than valuable to our economy and quality of life in the past as evidenced by the Haymaker golf facility as well as the tennis facility. This is not a tax for the benefit of any one interest group of locals — it benefits everyone in Steamboat.

By passing 2A and ensuring funding for significant community upgrades both to town and trails for 10 years, we are making moves to bring more money from more demographics of tourists to our town. This is just my humble opinion, but I 100 percent feel that passing this measure is a way to help continue our quality of life and bring in the tourism dollars that allow our community to exist and thrive. If you truly care about Steamboat and our economic future, please vote “yes” on 2A.

Comments

None of the details have been released of how there will be oversight on this 10 year spending authority. I predict that soon enough there will be a Yampa Valley Trails Authority with paid staff. And that will probably cause divide between the hard working volunteers of the Trail Authority Volunteers will soon enough be told to get out of the way and let the paid staff do their jobs. And so the Trails Alliance goes from a strong local group to one with no purpose and local trails building becomes part of YVTA.

I think it will soon enough be realized that the better way to fund trails would have been annual allocations approved by the city council. That a guaranteed funding mechanism came with too much administrative overhead and was a curse more than a blessing.

Hey, Scott W - I would sincerely and genuinely enjoy hearing a more 'in-depth' perspective on your stance against 2A.

The first question that comes to my mind - and in no way am I nearly as educated or well-read on the semantics or the verbiage of the allocation of the lodging tax dollars as you have proven to be - But, as I understand it, that money has to be spent on improvements to the city/valley that generate or promote tourism, etc... If not the bike trails and Yampa River Park, then what would you see fit to spend the money on to draw tourists to Steamboat?

A lot of people don't realize that this is not a "new tax" - rather it is spending money generated by people staying in our hotels and condos throughout the year... so what would be your proposal to spend those funds on?

Nate cites the tennis facility as "valuable to our economy." Without taking a position one way or the other, I note that at the City Council's budget retreat yesterday considerable time was spent discussing whether to sell, repurpose or mothball the tennis facility because it is a continuing and escalating drain on city dollars.

Hey, Scott W - I would sincerely and genuinely enjoy hearing a more 'in-depth' perspective on your stance against 2A.

The first question that comes to my mind - and in no way am I nearly as educated or well-read on the semantics or the verbiage of the allocation of the lodging tax dollars as you have proven to be - But, as I understand it, that money has to be spent on improvements to the city/valley that generate or promote tourism, etc... If not the bike trails and Yampa River Park, then what would you see fit to spend the money on to draw tourists to Steamboat?

A lot of people don't realize that this is not a "new tax" - rather it is spending money generated by people staying in our hotels and condos throughout the year... so what would be your proposal to spend those funds on?

I would love to vote for or against the measure, but, alas, I do not live within the city limits, and thus can not vote on something that affects everyone, not just city residents. The same thing happened when the vote came up for Haymaker. The City Council loves to tell the county what to do and what not to do, but county residents can not vote on things that affect them.